The Idaho Spending Index serves to provide a fiscally conservative perspective on state budgeting while providing an unbiased measurement of how Idaho lawmakers apply these values to their voting behavior on appropriations bills. Each bill is analyzed within the context of the metrics below. They receive one (+1) point for each metric that is satisfied by freedom-focused policymaking and lose one (-1) point for each instance in which the inverse is true. The sum of these points composes the score for the bill.
Rating: (-4)
Bill Description: House Bill 445 is an enhancement of $31,097,700 and 4.00 new full-time positions for the Department of Water Resources for fiscal year 2026. This legislation appropriates a total of $113,353,100 and 174.00 full-time positions to the agency.
Does this budget incur any wasteful spending among discretionary funds, including new line items? Conversely, does this budget contain any provisions that serve to reduce spending where possible (i.e. base reductions, debt reconciliation, etc.)?
The headline item for this legislation is $30 million for water infrastructure and recharge projects throughout the state. This was a request added by the governor and relies on the Water Resource Board — an entity established by the Idaho Constitution — to discuss financing, selection, and execution of water projects. These members are not elected but are instead appointed by the governor.
Until this point the Legislature oversaw the use of appropriations water infrastructure projects. In just the last three fiscal years, this amounted to $110.5 million in spending on statutorily defined projects. The $30 million addition called for in this legislation is different, however, since it will be an ongoing appropriation — akin to setting up a multimillion-dollar auto-pay for government water projects. Enacting this bill would mean that an unelected board not subject to oversight would decide how best to allocate resources for water projects. This would displace the role held by the Legislature and could lead to waste and abuse of these funds.
(-1)
Is the continuation or growth in ongoing spending, if any, inappropriate for the changes in circumstances, scope of the agency, or current economic environment? Conversely, is the continuation or growth in ongoing spending appropriate given any change in circumstances or economic pressures?
This legislation funds ongoing spending for the Department of Water Resources at over $80 million. Some $50 million is from the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA), which is one time in nature but reappropriated each year. Therefore, ARPA funds don’t contribute to the permanent growth of the size of government.
Removing ARPA funds from our analysis, this legislation funds ongoing spending within the agency at over $32 million growing from the base by over 17% in the last three years, which is still faster than the growth allowed by inflation.
Because of the accelerated growth in this budget the last three years, a truly fiscally responsible enhancement budget for FY2026 would reverse the growth with a negative appropriation — a reduction to the base budget.
(-1)
Does this budget perpetuate or expand state dependence on federal dollars, thereby violating principles of federalism? Conversely, does this budget actively reduce the amount of federal dollars used to balance this budget?
The Department of Water Resources receives about $51.9 million in federal funding to support what would be a $113.4 million appropriation if House Bill 445 is enacted by the Legislature. This means federal funds constitute 46% of the total budget for this agency. This shows the department depends on F Washington, D.C., to underwrite its work.
(-1)
Does the budget grow government through the addition of new permanent FTPs or through funding unlegislated efforts to create new or expanded entitlement programs? Conversely, does this budget reduce the size of government staff and programs except where compelled by new legislation?
House Bill 445 includes a $516,100 appropriation to hire 4.00 new FTPs to split the Water Management Bureau in two: an administration bureau and a resource protection bureau. The addition of these new FTPs increase the overall cost to run the agency and the overall size of government.
(-1)
